Joint Stock Company Channel One Russia Worldwide v. Infomir LLC
- George Daniels
- 1:16-cv-01318
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Joint Stock Company Channel One Russia Worldwide v. Infomir LLC, Judge Moses ordered SK Management to clarify which judge and rule it invoked to challenge a filing order.
Defendant SK Management of New York, whose challenge to the December 6, 2021 filing order had to be clarified; plaintiffs could respond.
What happened
Joint Stock Company Channel One Russia Worldwide v. Infomir LLC involved defendant SK Management of New York’s request for relief from an earlier order. That order said the last six pages of SK Management’s expanded summary-judgment opposition brief were stricken and would be disregarded.
SK Management’s letter-motion referred to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 72 and 60 and addressed both Judge Daniels and Judge Moses. The court said SK Management could not seek relief from two judges under two different standards at the same time.
The court ordered SK Management to state in writing, by December 29, 2021, which form of relief it wanted. Plaintiffs could respond by January 4, 2022. Judge Moses stated that if SK Management did not clarify, she would treat the motion as a request for reconsideration under the district’s local rule.
The detailed version
- Joint Stock Company Channel One Russia Worldwide v. Infomir LLC · No. 1:16-cv-01318
- George Daniels
- Dec. 27, 2021
Background
Defendant SK Management of New York (SKM) filed a letter-motion seeking relief from the Court’s December 6, 2021 order. That earlier order advised SKM that the last six pages of its refiled and improperly expanded opposition brief concerning summary judgment had been stricken and would be disregarded.
SKM’s motion was addressed to District Judge George Daniels and Magistrate Judge Barbara Moses. It cited Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72, which permits objections to a magistrate judge’s decision on a nondispositive pretrial matter, and Rule 60, which concerns relief from a judgment or order. The court explained that a request under Rule 72 would be reviewed by the district judge under the standard of whether the order was clearly erroneous or contrary to law. A request to Judge Moses under Rule 60 would be treated in substance as a motion for reconsideration governed by Local Civil Rule 6.3.
Ruling
Judge Moses ordered SKM to specify in writing, without argument, no later than December 29, 2021, whether it sought relief from Judge Daniels under Rule 72(a) or from Judge Moses under Rule 60 and Local Civil Rule 6.3. The order stated that SKM could not seek relief from both judges under both standards at the same time. Plaintiffs were permitted to respond by January 4, 2022. If SKM failed to clarify its request, Judge Moses said she would construe the motion as one for reconsideration under Local Civil Rule 6.3. The order did not decide whether the six pages should remain stricken.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.